Quote:
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn
This argument is asinine. Take your logic to any other rule...
8-7-B: "The runner is out when the ball is live and while the runner is not in contact with the base, the runner is legally touched with the ball in the hands of the fielder."
Therefore, by your way of reading the book, if a fielder catches the ball and steps on a base the runner is forced to, the runner is not out ... because all the pieces of 8-7-B have not been fulfilled.
Is this stupid? Of course it is ... because there are 24 other letters in rule 8-7.
It's just as absurd as the way you're parsing this rule. You're intentionally omitting the first (and most important) sentence and reading the 2nd sentence alone and out of context. The second sentence is merely a clarification of what happens in one specific instance, just as 8-7-b is one specific instance.
|
The argument may be asinine and stupid, but what else is there to talk about?
The conumdrum is that nowhere does it definitively state that a batter-runner is out if he/she hits an infield fly, period. It doesn't say that in the Rule 1 Definitions. That only defines what constitutes an Infield Fly.
8-2-I used to under the old rule, but now it reads as if it requires the batter-runner to be hit with the ball. Yes, that may cover one specific instance. But the "routine" infield fly declaration was removed when the two sentences were combined into one.
8-2-J only says an Infield Fly has precedence over an intentionally dropped ball. But again, what do you go back to to find that precedence?
8-4-L mentions the Infield Fly, but only in the context of when other runners may advance.
9-1-A provides guidance on an Infield Fly as it relates to protests.
The NCAA rule book definitively states a batter is out if she hits an infield fly under Defintion 1.68 and Rule 11.18. The NFHS rule book also clearly states that in Definition 2-30 and in Rule 8-2-9. The ASA book? Not anymore.
I know, I know. Asinine and stupid. But to me, equally mysterious.
